tv Fareed Zakaria GPS CNN June 5, 2011 10:00am-11:00am PDT
i could never support any arrangement that reduces benefits for medicare. absolutely not. >> that's today's "sound of sunday." this july 3rd we'll be hosting a "state of the union" special on the american dream. we'd like to hear from you. post your own experiences with the american dream on our facebook page or e-mail us. thank you for watching "state of the union." i'm candy crowley in washington. up next for our viewers in the united states, "fareed zakaria: gps." this is "fareed zakaria: gps." first up, fears of a double dip. debt wars in the u.s. and europe and much more. a debate between two great economists, jeffrey sachs and kenneth rogoff. then, everyone is worried about an islamic takeover in egypt,
about the imposition of sharia. well, we got to one of the leaders of the muslim brotherhood to ask what would they do if they did win the elections? next up, germany and switzerland are shutting down their nuclear plants. what is the future of nuclear energy? i'll talk to the brilliant inventor nathan myrhvold about that and why america finds itself losing this race to innovate. we'll do more on innovation tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern and pacific in a special report with "time" magazine called "restoring the american dream: how to innovate." set your alarms, your dvrs, maybe even your vcr. but if you have a vcr, you're not being very innovative these days. any ai, here's my take. all the talk in the united states and europe is about deficits and debt. in washington, the battle over the debt ceiling continues. but let me tell you about the real crisis we face in america,
and europe has its own version of this, a crisis that could cripple america's economy and its society and would make the debt problem much, much worse. it is america's jobs crisis. the number of americans who are unemployed has roughly doubled since the financial crisis and recession hit. though that number is declining, it is doing so very slowly. most new jobs are for part-time work at wages that average $19,000. that is half the median income. if you add these numbers together, the actual number of americans without ooh full-time job is closer to 24 million. everyone is expecting that the normal pattern of growth and job creation will start up soon, except that it hasn't. two years into the recovery, growth is stuck at about 2% and job creation has reached 250,000
a month, which might sound high, but is actually barely enough to keep pace with all the new workers entering the job market for the first time. if unemployment doesn't drop a great deal fast, and it shows no signs of doing this, problems proliferate in all directions. the most significant impact is on the lives of the unemployed. studies show that after a few years of not working, people lose their talents, their skills, the work habits that make it possible for them to work productively and to be productive citizens. they risk becoming a lost generation, lost to their country, their communities, their families. the new normal of slower growth and lower job creation also means lower tax revenues, more unemployment and health benefits to be paid out, therefore, a much larger deficit. president obama's budget assumes that the economy will create 20 million jobs over the next ten years.
that would be a dramatic acceleration. over the past ten years, it has produced only 1.7 million. congressman paul ryan's plan envisions unemployment dropping to 50-year lows to make his budget numbers work. that would require magic at this point. if you assume unemployment stays high, the deficit and debt become unimaginably higher. so what to do? several things to spur job creation. i wrote about them last week in "time" magazine. you can find them on time.com. briefly, create a regulatory and tax climate that helps small businesses since they create most of the new jobs, revive manufacturing by focusing on research, technical training and apprenticeship, help growth industries like entertainment and tourism to expand, and perhaps most urgently, rebuild america's dilapidated infrastructure and put millions of people in the construction and housing industries back to work.
the crucial point is if you care about america's economy, including and centrally including the deficit, you need to get people back to work, being productive, spending money and paying taxes. and we need to do this fast. let's get started. it was a week of almost all bad economic news. bad housing data, bad job numbers, bad news from europe, and bad days for the financial markets. the battle over the debt ceiling continues as does the deadlock over deficit reduction. what to make of it all? on my left and the left, i suppose, is columbia university's jeffrey sachs. the other side of the table, and i suppose the political spectrum, harvard university's kenneth rogoff. welcome, gentlemen. >> thank you. >> jeff, when you look at these job numbers, if you do the math, we're creating about 250,000 jobs a quarter. that barely takes into account
the new entrance to the labor market. i did a back of the envelope calculation, it will be 12 years before we get to 7% unemployment. >> of course, there is a lot of uncertainty right now, but i think what is clear is the economy is dragging, unemployment is high and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. of course, the headline unemployment number hides a lot of suffering of people that have withdrawn from the labor market or working only short hours because they have to. so, this economy is still sick. it is not showing dynamism, and we have serious problems ahead. without a functional washington. >> what do you do with this problem of unemployment? if the unemployment numbers don't go down, even the budget projections are all off, they assume -- the president's budget
assumes we'll create 20 million jobs in the next ten years. paul ryan says we'll go to an unemployment rate we haven't seen in 45 years. if you put today's unemployment rate in those budget projections, the deficit is 50% bigger. >> i don't think having the government solve everything is the answer. >> what is the answer? how do you -- all i'm saying is, if the unemployment numbers don't go down, the deficit goes up substantially. >> it's going to go up if we don't grow faster, that's a key to how well we do. i mean, i'm cautiously optimistic that over the medium term we will start to grow faster. very, very hard to know how soon. we have a lot of debt hanging out in the economy. i actually think that's the major headwind at the moment. public debt, private debt. just piling it on, piling it on. instead of talking about a bad year, we could be talking about a bad decade. >> what's the evidence the public debt is the headwind when we are able to borrow more cheaply than we ever have been able to in history? >> there's a lot of evidence
looking at historical data, when you start getting into the territory we are at some point, it hits you. you may not have a crisis like they're having in europe, but have you to do something quicker than you'd like -- raise taxes, cut spending and that slows growth. so, it's sort of pay now or pay later. i'd like to smooth it out. >> what should we do about europe? europe is an interesting case. probably in europe they have no option. they probably had to cut spending because the deficit was ballooning. greece wasn't able to borrow money. now the rescue package that has been provided for greece does not seem large enough. german officials are talking about maybe let the greeks restructure. on the other hand, there are other european officials who say, no, no, no, this will be another lehman brothers. it will cause a run on all european banks. what's the right answer? >> the problem in the southern tier periphery countries, especially greece, is they have a lot of debt now. and in order to pay that debt,
they would have to make a great austerity measures, which are socially very disruptive and very, very large. greece is kind of a borderline because the burden of this debt, more than 100% of national income, means the interest payments each year, several percent of gnp, really gets them. on the one hand it's no small thing to pay this debt off or even to service it. on the other hand, simply defaulting could be devastating for the greek economy and could have very big repercussions. i've been in the view they should take the austerity measures, they should try to pay the debt that they haven't yet demonstrated yes or no whether it's possible. >> don't let greece default, in other words? >> that's my view. >> would you agree with that? >> i don't. first i want to say, they're still getting money. they're not paying net interest. they're getting more money than they're having to pay back. so, it really hasn't been tested
what they're willing to do. i just think -- >> the budget cuts are real. >> the budget cuts are real but a lot of them are projected. we don't know if they're -- >> do you think it's just inevitable they -- they can't pay back these -- >> well, you never say can't with a country because so much is about politics and willingness to pay. but i can say if you look at what they owe foreigners and what they owe domestically, it's of a scale where it's very, very rare to dig your way out, unless you grow like china. if they grow like china, it will be great. they'll have a lot of income. >> do you think you can avoid a crisis? in other words, do you see some way of muddling through? this has been the european approach so far because they don't want another potential lehman brothers. >> i've been involved in many, many debt restructuring circumstances, but usually the countries end up in -- or not end up, they're already in a very, very deep mess and even after the restructuring it takes some time to get out of.
so, i'm weary of it, for all the reasons you're saying. i can't guarantee there is a way out. i just wouldn't rush into it and even though austerity is painful, these are developed economies. these are not people living at the edge of extreme poverty. these are countries that can do better and should do better. all of it is very, very tough. there's no question about it. but the muddling through at this moment, i think, is actually still the best -- very imperfect but the best way forward. >> i have to ask you. i think i know what jeff feels on this to finally -- republicans and the debt ceiling, does it make sense to play -- to play with this? does it make sense to play a game of brinksmanship on the debt ceiling issue? >> i'm not very happy about it. i mean, i understand in politics, you know, no holds barred, you have to do what you can to exercise power to get your way, but it seems like an unattractive way to run things. mind you, the democrats have
voted against the debt ceiling when they were in the other position. it sort of telescopes all decisions into this one big day where you make all these decisions. and i don't think we're really coming out with smart decisions at the end. we need tax reform not just tax hikes. we don't just need spending cuts. there are areas we need spending increases. we need to rethink the government in a positive way. we are in trouble if we take 15 years to figure this out. we're not greece but you know what, in 15 years like this, we will be. we can have growth. we can do things better but i don't see it happening. >> on that note, ken, jeff, thank you very much. we will be right back. >> you know that many people think of the muslim brotherhood as believes in political islam or violence or extremism or jihad. what do you say to people like that? ordinary rubs don't always work on my arthritis.
brotherhood, this is the largest political movement in egypt, probably the most islamic political party in the world. founded in 1928 with slogan, islam is the solution. it promises to make the koran and its teachings the sole reference point for ordering the life of the muslim family, individual, community and state. it has officially been against violence but has had breakaway groups and members who have practiced jihad. it has been banned as a political party in egypt for decades, a ban lifted only this year in the wake of egypt's democratic revolution. but even if it is nonviolent, how would it impose its religious views on egypt? is islam compatible with democracy? when i was in cairo recently, i sat down with one of the muslim brotherhood senior leaders who also serves as the group's spokesman, essam el-erian. he is generally regarded as the moderate face of the brotherhood, and many egyptian secularists and liberals told me they were worried that this was the message the brotherhood wanted to get out publicly but
it might harbor more radical intentions privately. we'll follow that careful by but for now a rare opportunity to hear from the brotherhood itself. dr. el-erian, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for coming to egypt. >> you are the face of the muslim brotherhood. are you the spokesman. you are very senior in the organization. let's start by just introducing you to my viewers. what do you do? >> i'm a physician earning my life from hematologist and laboratory man. >> so, you're a hematologist? >> i am still hematologist and lab. >> and yet you are a senior figure in the muslim brotherhood and the brotherhood has been banned for many, many years, until recently, of course. did you spend any time in jail? >> i spent about seven years, ten months in jail. i was charged by managing and affiliating to muslim
brotherhood, which was outlawed organization. >> so, it was just the fact you belonged to the muslim brotherhood, that you managed -- >> only. no charges of any activities except political, social and educational activities. >> now, you know that many people in the western world, particularly, think of the muslim brotherhood as an organization that is -- believes in political islam or violence or extremism or jihad. what do you say to people like that? >> i say to them, you must go to islam itself to understand islam. islam is islam. and i think islam is a very peaceful religion. it's a way of life. it is cooperating with all others, respecting all religions, respecting humanity,
respecting peace and prosperity, working for peace in the world. >> what did you think of the assassination of osama bin laden? >> we as muslim brotherhood condemn violence. from any side. we were waiting for trial for osama bin laden because we want to know the truth about everything which was directed, charged by osama bin laden himself. and also we are against any intervention, mainly by force, by violence, which violates sovereignty of any country, especially pakistan. we ask in our statement after killing osama bin laden it is a time to withdraw troops from afghanistan after destroying the country, and also from iraq. mr. obama promised his voters, not us, that he is going to end
such war, which was killing more than killed in 11 september. now maybe millions are killed. >> do you think terrorism is ever justified? >> nobody can justify terrorism at all. killing innocent people is condemned in all religions, in any law. >> do you believe that a woman is worth half her man? because the sharia says a woman counts as half, a woman would inherit half as much as a man, a man can divorce a woman but a woman cannot divorce a man. >> but sharia also said woman is equal to man. and these cases you mentioned must be explained and understood in the whole context of the sharia. woman in some cases inherit more than men.
and woman in some cases may have equal to the man. and in such -- in many -- in some cases can have half of the man. depends in every case. >> one of the questions that lots of people have -- this is not just westerners, this is egyptians who tell me -- ask him, what does he want to do? what does the muslim brotherhood want to do if they do a chief achieve power, if they get power in egypt? what is their vision for egypt? so, what would you change? would you like to see stricter interpretation of sharia? would you like to see women given subordinate rule -- roles? what is your vision? >> i would like those egyptian people to ask me face to face, not via media. and we are -- >> you can't talk to 18 million egyptians so i'm going to do it for you. >> not all egyptians watch cnn. so, they are facing us everywhere.
first of all, we are not going to catch power in egypt. >> but what would you -- what would you change about egypt today? >> we are going to have independent democratic civil country. this is our main goal now. and i think this is gaining a very national consensus. the people are the only source of authority. the only source of authority is the people themselves. >> so, would you support the kind of civil law egypt has now rather than a religious law? >> in islam, you don't have a religious law. in islam you have a civil law. civil law means that the people have decision in their parliament after keeping in mind difference of sharia, difference of islam. >> would non-muslims have the same right as muslims? >> non-muslims, infidels have
in civil state with the background of sharia have equal rights and equal duties. >> the kind of program sounds very moderate, very modern. why do you think people are still so suspicious? and i say, again n egypt, lots of people tell me their intentions are not fully democratic. >> because the people are facing the unknown. unknown is democracy, not muslim brotherhood. unknown is state of law, not muslim brotherhood. the whole chance now, it is the first time for them to have the power by themselves and to elect a parliament by themselves and to appoint a president by themselves. first time for both since two centuries. suspicious not towards us only. towards everything. >> what is the action you want to see from president obama? >> we ask, stop supporting dictatorships, stop neglecting palestinian rights, stop the war
on terrorism which damage the islamic world and, unfortunately, he never done so. >> essam el erian, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> we'll be back. >> we must stand with those who want to build pakistan. >> providing this assistance is not only the right thing to do, but we believe it is essential to global security and the security of the united states.
first some facts. since 9/11 a decade ago, washington has given the government of pakistan more than $20 billion in aid. two-thirds of that has gone to the military to fight the war on terror. the other third, about $6 billion, has gone for development of pakistan's civilian economy and society. the theory behind many of those billions of dollars is that by bringing pakistan's poorest out of poverty and despair, fewer young men will be seduced by radical islam. >> they rely on assistance in order to be able to wage this fight with us. >> we must stand with those who want to build pakistan. >> providing this assistance is not only the right thing to do, but we believe it is essential to global security and the security of the united states. >> an admirable approach for sure. it's a strategy the u.s. uses all over the world from baghdad to bali and back.
but what if you discover aid money does not make pakistanis less likely to turn to terror? what if you learn there's actually no correlation between being poor and supporting islamic extremism? well, that's what a new serious academic study seems to prove . it's a robust survey by four academics from princeton, georgetown, and the university of pennsylvania. they've conducted extensive field research in pakistan, interviewing 6,000 people across a broad spectrum of income groups and geography. and their findings could challenge the way we approach fighting terror. not just in pakistan but around the world. first, they find in general pakistanis don't like militant groups, not just al qaeda but the other ones like the pakistani or afghan taliban. second, contrary to conventional wisdom, pakistanis like military groups more than middle classes.
the people who hate militants most are the urban poor, probably because more than any other group they're the ones impacted by terror attacks -- bombs in subways, cafes or whatever. it's an interesting conclusion. the people we've long considered the likeliest candidates for extremism are actually the ones most against it. the study points out that this goes against most of the existing policy literature on the subject. it cites both the u.s. state department and the uk's department for international development as saying poverty motivates people to extreme violence. now, giving aid to poor people is good in and of itself, but if we have been doing that to prevent them from becoming islamic fundamentalists, then this study suggests we've been aiming at the wrong target. perhaps our focus should be on the middle classes or on secular education. research shows that members of the ira in northern ireland or hezbollah militant ring are more likely to come from economically
advantaged family with a relatively high level of schooling. these are important issues for washington to consider. who does it want to give economic aid to? those are long-term issues. for now, what i want to say in the short term is, let's at least focus on accountability for this aid, for both hard and soft aid. we need to demand results. what is the money achieving? a cnn poll from last week shows nearly half of all americans think all aid to pakistan should be stopped. another quarter think it should be reduced. it seems like ten years and $20 billion later, the american people understand basic lessons in accounting, that washington has been learning the hard way. pentagon documents now show that we are rejecting nearly half of islamabad's claims for expenses over the last two years. but the more important question is, will the pakistani military n return for all this money, finally move against the terror
organizations that they claim to be willing to battle? it's long delayed but it is the right message that we should be sending. american purse strings are important and necessary from afghanistan to zimbabwe, but they don't have to remain open at all costs. and we will be right back. >> the world has little over 400 nuclear plants right now. there are people who predict china will build 400 just in china within the course of the next 30 years. ♪ ♪
quarter of its power from nuclear energy today. germany's neighbor, switzerland, said its own power grids would be nuclear free by 2032. both decisions can be traced back to the nuclear meltdowns in japan following the earthquake and tsunami in march. is this rational? that's what i wanted to get to the bottom of. so, i've asked one of the most brilliant mind i know, who is trying to create a safer nuclear power plant with new technology. nathan myrhvold. his story is amazing, he had a ph.d. by 23, studied physics under stephen hawking, was chief technology officer at microsoft, also a paleontologists who has discovered nine t-rexs, he is a master chef and his company holds 30,000 patents. all in a day's work, right? welcome back to the program, nathan. >> great to be here. >> when you saw what was happening in japan, what was your reaction? >> well, i think the first thing to understand, this is a slide rule-era plant designed in the
1960s and designed with a bunch of design decisions that you just have to question. as was typical of plants of that era, it's unsafe if the electricity every goes off. you needed to pump coolant through the plant at all timed. you should never have the electricity off. so, the strategy was to say, final, let's have diesel generators as backup. and to put the diesel generator essentially at sea level in an area that gets tsunamis. the problem is that the water from the tsunami flooded the diesel generators. and at that point they were pretty much screwed. but things got worse from that point onward. the response to the disaster -- you know, in washington we say the cover-up is worse than the crime. well, in a disaster, the disaster response or lack thereof can be worse than the disaster itself. that's what happened in this case. >> but with all that said, what
i'm struck by is not one person has died as a result of the nuclear power plant's failings. one person died because a crane hit that person. what does that tell you? >> well, you know, it shows how concerned people are about nuclear technology. that you have -- no one knows fully yet, 10,000, 15,000 people die in the tsunami? essentially no one dies because of the radioactivity? yet from the coverage you would think the radioactivity was the primary issue. the fact is, living near the sea shore in japan is dangerous. and with probability one, there will be a tsunami. now, in this case the plant was not designed very well for that. they never should have had those generators as low as they did. today's plants aren't designed that way at all. a typical modern generation plant doesn't rely on electricity. our plant is designed to even a level above that. literally, if you just shut the coolant off, the plant's fine.
and unless you sucked all the air away from that, in which case we would probably have bigger problems. >> what about people who say the problem with nuclear power is not so much it's dangerous, it's really expensive? commercially it really isn't justified. the only way it works is because of massive government subsidies. >> nuclear is really expensive in this country and in europe in part because of the way that -- the relatively undisciplined way we've built them in the past. >> what does that mean? >> well, most plants were built one-off separate different each plant. it was like every home was an absolute custom home where nothing was done quite the same way before. >> you don't have the economies of scale you get from having a single kind of template that is then -- >> exactly. in china, the -- all of the indications are that they are building nuclear plants for the same price or cheaper than coal plants. >> wow.
so, your technology, why is it a real step forward? >> i think the first thing you have to do is say, what energy problem are we trying to solve. in my view, the energy problem for the 21st century is this -- how do we get developed world per capita energy to every citizen of earth? if you look at the developing world, if you look at china and india and brazil, the whole world wants our per capita energy level. we're talking about a energy pie maybe a factor of ten bigger than we're talking about today. that's a very different problem. >> your nuclear technology tries to solve the problem that says, with the growth of the emerging markets you're going to need to consume massively more energy than you're consuming now and this is why this works. >> that's right, that's right. as an example, the world has a little over 400 nuclear plants right now. there are people who predict china will build 400 just in
china within the course of the next 30 years. i mean, doubling the total just in that one country. so, to do this, you need to have an energy technology that scales. we also have the possibility that we can burn nuclear waste as fuel. so, we can take spent fuel rods from other reactors or we can take the depleted uranium waste that comes from separating fuel and we can burn that as fuel. that's an amazing thing because that would allow us to run the whole u.s. economy for more than 100 years on stuff we've already dug up and costing taxpayers money guarding it as dangerous nuclear waste. >> how close are you to actually being able to build a plant using your technology? >> so, we're in the process of doing a plant design. but then there's all the technical and regulatory issues, because the plant has to be built somewhere. it has to be in someone's backyard. if everyone is a not in my backyard mode, you're kind of stuck.
because of the fukushima situation, this has not been the best six months to be out there trying to convince people to build a new nuclear technology. fortunately, there's parts of the world that realize that there is this energy crisis coming. and that's mostly what we're talking. >> we'll come back and talk more with nathan. when we come back, we'll talk about the challenges from china, from south carolina to american innovation.
i'm martin savidge in atlanta. let's look at our top stories. there are conflicting reports on the condition of yemen's president. he's receiving treatment in saudi arabia after an attack on his palace. he is said to suffer shrapnel wounds and severe burns. but western diplomatic sources say he is having brain surgery. but sal lay's spokesman says
he's simply getting a checkup. yemen's vice president is in charge in sal lay's absence. rocks, tear gas and gunfire on the border suffering syria and the golan heights. crowds advanced on the syrian side of border today in a protest to mark the anniversary of the six-day war. israeli troops did open fire, warning shots, according to the army, but a report on syrian television said 20 people were killed, more than 325 hurt. in arizona, a massive battle against wildfires that have scorched more than a quarter of a million acres. one of the biggest is near a resort town in northeast arizona. at least 2,200 people have been evacuated. hundreds more have been told to pack up and get ready to leave their homes. join me for more news at the top of the hour. "fareed zakaria: gps" continues after this. ttd# 1-800-345-2550
sleep every night. why not talk to someone who's sleeping on the most highly recommended bed in america... it's not a sealy... or a simmons... or a serta... ask me about my tempur-pedic. ask me how fast i fall asleep. ask me about staying asleep. these are actual tempur-pedic owners! ask someone you know---check out twitter... try your friends on facebook. you'll hear it all...un-edited. ask me how it feels after 10 years. ask me if it's a good value. just ask me. there are 4 million tempur-pedic owners! and they're more satisfied than owners of any traditional mattress brand. ask me why i feel better every morning. ask me why someone who's never had an ache or a pain is in love with this bed. start asking real owners. ask me how we took the first step... take the first step right now! call or click today for your free information kit with dvd. call the number on your screen or visit tempurpedic.com. tempur-pedic. the most highly recommended bed in america.
and we are back with nathan myrhvold, former chief technologist with microsoft. poly math inventor. one of the things you've talked about, well, the chinese are doing this, the south koreans are doing this. they're actually doing better than we are in many areas. how worried are you that the united states is no longer going to be the place that invents the future? >> i'm very worried. current course and speed, we're very good at inventing, but we're also undermining our ability to do that in lots of ways. in the case of nuclear, we decided as a nation to stop building nuclear plants 30 years ago. pretty hard to have innovation on new plants if you stop building them. >> what about in other technologies? >> the trouble is when you get successful, it's easy to get fat, dumb and happy and lazy
about things, and unfortunately, as a nation, we often tend to do that. china recently announced that it's going on a big policy push to file more patents and have the strongest patent system and the largest number of patents in the world. while they're getting serious, we tend to fiddle. a lot of the prosperity of the united states tech sector was due to fundamental investments that darpa and other governmental agencies made through the '60s, '70s, and '80ls. they're not making the same kinds of investments now. they say the industry will take care of it, but the industry can take care of a class of things. really basic fundamental needs still have to come from the government. one of the things that strikes me historically is the united
states became the world's inventor at a stage when we were a developing country, okay? the 19th stli, america is primarily an agricultural nation, starting to move into heavy industry, but even by 1850, we had invented things like the telegraph, the cotton gin, you know, thomas edison invented tons of things. we became what others are today. we have the spirit, we have the ability to do it, you just have to make sure the government and policies and other things don't get in the way of it. and if we can manage to not get lazy, i think we can play a very important role as the world's inventors for a long time to come. the combination of innovation and change and thoughtfulness and risk taking, that's been unique here. it won't be unique forever, and we can't be cavalier about that.
>> pleasure to have you on. >> thank you. >> if you find this stuff as fascinating and important as i do, you won't want to miss a special edition of gpa tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. this one is called "how to innovate." we called upon some of the greatest minds in innovation today to talk about how to solve the rather dire situation nathan just talked about. we'll also show you some amazing recent innovation. don't miss it tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. and we'll be right back.
questions. make sure you read the interviews and takes from some of our leading experts. you can also follow me on facebook and twitter. i hope you will indulge me. this week's book of the week is my book, "the post-american world." it is out in a special 2.0 edition. the first edition was published more than three years ago, and since then we've had the global financial crisis and president obama's election, so i've tried to include these large phenomena. whether you've read the original or not, i'm sure you'll get a lot out of the new version. now for a last look. you remember on president obama's recent trip to europe, his car went out. a minor blip for the vehicle we've come to know as the beast. it turns out the car ran afoul of another hurdle, london's c congestion charge. it turns out president obama has
to pay, too, about $16 for the beast and the same amount for each and every car in his motorcade. it also turns out this charge is a bit of a sticking point. london's mayor is said to have told president obama at the state dinner at buckingham palace that the u.s. government owes him nearly $9 million in congestion fines. they dispute that. they say it's a type of tax, and by law, they're exempt from taxes. london contests this. is anyone exempt from these charges? actually, yes. the pope, sort of. the popemobile was not slapped with the tax after last year's fateful trip to london because all the roads were closed for the day. sounds strange to me. the correct answer to our gps challenge question was a, the traditionally buttoned up office workers in japan are being asked to dress casually this summer. no ties, no jackets, so